Rules. Excellent! I shall add your list of rules for people who think in terms of rules. very important to try and cover all the different ways different people think. Also those examples I added to Caveats are directly from you I added yesterday. I like to expand my writing with any suggestions.
I’ve been studying how different people think in fundamentally different ways. Falls in the category of Temperament Theory. An excellent book is where you can order the book direct.
A good companion book is . Gives real life examples of the various character and temperament types.
I’m also interested in Conservative vs. Progressive thought in politics, as here’s a real life example of two fundamentally different thought processes dividing our country. The topic includes Cognitive Science, Temperament Theory, Linguistics, Sociobiology & Evolutionary Biology. I list some books I’ve read at <a href="http://members.cox.net/deleyd/religion/bookr.html#REDBLUE:35gs8xjk]RED vs. BLUE: The Difference Between the Conservative and Progressive Thought Process[/url:35gs8xjk”>. Here’s a summary of what Cognitive Science reveals, which is kind of heavy stuff:
- [*:35gs8xjk]Cognitive science shows people understand abstract concepts in terms of metaphors which explain the abstract concept in terms of less abstract concepts.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]God is an abstract concept. One metaphor we use to understand God is the family metaphor, where God is the parent and we are his children. "God the father…", "Our father which art in heaven…". Also God created us, as parents create their children.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]Government is an abstract concept. One way we understand government is by using the family metaphor, with government as the parent and citizens the children. (We speak of nation’s "founding fathers," who gave "birth" to our nation. When our nation was new it was in it’s "infancy.")[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]Different concepts of what a family should be produce different concepts of what Religion should be and what Government should be.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]How a parent should raise their children is an abstract concept which we understand by using metaphors to simpler concepts. Professor Lakoff identifies about two dozen of these metaphors we all use and understand.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]Both Progressives and Conservatives use and understand the same metaphors when thinking about government or religion.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]The difference between Progressives and Conservatives is how they prioritize these metaphors. When we order the metaphors in terms of priority we find that Progressives order the metaphors one way, and Conservatives order the metaphors in reverse order. The metaphors Progressives hold as most important are the ones Conservatives hold as least important, and vice versa.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]One can not logically determine which metaphor is more important than another. People do not determine their moral priorities by logically analyzing the metaphors themselves.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]Both progressive and conservative logic is sound. There are no fundamental flaws of reasoning to expose. Once you prioritize the metaphors, the rest follows.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]However, you CAN observe the results of using the progressive philosophy vs. the conservative philosophy. In the last chapters of Lakoff’s book he shows that:
- [*:35gs8xjk]Research clearly indicates the progressive "Nurturant Parent" model is superior as a method of child rearing.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]The conservative "Strict Father" morality requires a view of human thought that is at odds with what we know about the way the mind works.[/*:m:35gs8xjk]
[*:35gs8xjk]The conservative "Strict Father" morality often finds morality in harm; progressive "Nurturant Parent" morality does not. [/*:m:35gs8xjk][/list:o:35gs8xjk][/*:m:35gs8xjk][/list:o:35gs8xjk]
…and that’s why I should add a "Rules" paragraph to Caveats.